Sorry, I don't care much what Bernie says

[MannyGoldstein]

Last edited Sat Nov 7, 2015, 09:00 PM - Edit history (1)

Nor do I care what Hillary says, nor what most other people say when they're running for office.

In the case of politicians who've been around a while, they have records. If their record is consistant, I will count on it to remain consistent once elected. If their record shows that they coincidentally change their position whenever it's coincidentally politically or monetarily convenient to do so, I will count on that to remain consistent once elected.

Positions today? Just one data point of many.

(And if they don't have much of a track record... they should be given an opportunity to get more of a track record before being given the most powerful office on Earth.)

In any case, it seems to me that the clear way forward is clear.

[sadoldgirl]

1. Sorry, you are a person, who would look up

the records of the candidates. I would say
in this case you are in 1% of the general
voting population.

See, you can now claim to be in the 1% group.

Congratulations!

[sabrina 1]

2. It's really very simple, isn't it? All the noise and all the talking points TRY to complicate it,

but in the end it comes down to 'who can we trust' and the best way to determine that is to look at their records.

Bernie's record stands out as one of the most consistent on almost every important issue he was asked to make a decision on.

That's why I support him.

Kissing babies, photo ops with people they didn't notice until they were running for office, none of that matters, just who can we trust?

[azmom]

3. A lack of record is why Obama was encouraged to

Run for president so early in his career. It absolutely does matter. Those that claim it doesn't are being disingenuous at best.

[wendylaroux]

4. Seems so easy,

why do people ignore it?

[jeff47]

5. Because they'd prefer a different result. (nt)

[rhett o rick]

6. That dang bug drives me nuts.

I used to only have to put up with it from one poster and now.........

My problem is that I am easily distract

[jeff47]

7. What?

[wilsonbooks]

9. That is the thing about trying to squash a real political movement.

Every time they stomp on one insect, a dozen more pop up.

[rhett o rick]

14. Yes but in this case my laptop screen is in danger. We had a great tomato crop

this year and also a great fruit fly crop. More than once I've smacked the screen trying to kill a fruit fly. When it was only L0onix it was ok, I expected it. Now, somehow it multiplied and has even infected my signature.

[Ned_Devine]

19. How do I get...

...that Bernie 2016 poster and crawling fly in my posts? Getting an avatar and a sig line was tricky enough for me

[rhett o rick]

22. I am not the best at this but if you right click on the image and view "image info"

you should see the source url listed. For the bug: http:// i63.tinypic.com/219e79c.jpg and for the Poster is http:// imgur.com/LVGKYZn.jpg.

Go to "my profile" and then your signature line (edit) and paste the url.

Let me know if you have trouble.

Edit. I needed to place a space after the "http://" so you can see the url code. Remove the spaces when you paste them.

[Hydra]

23. Pop into your profile and copy this in:

http://i63.tinypic.com/219e79c with .jpg at the end

[Ned_Devine]

28. Thank you both!

[NonMetro]

71. Ban The Bug!

It's distracting, and all they do is crawl around in a figure 8.

Of course, it is better than listening to Carly Fiorina talk!

[Ned_Devine]

73. It's our show of unity

There are posters on this site that have the same fly, with a graphic that appears and then swats the fly. Never mind that killing another creature is a very unenlightened thing to do, it was their way of disrespecting a member here whose distinct characteristic was the distracting fly. I've noticed that the people who also added the fly to their profiles are on the same page as I am as far as who I support in the primaries. The fly swatter people are in an opposition group, it appears.

[lastlib]

80. The bug certainly has more integrity!

and, likely, more brains

[freedom fighter jh]

15. +1

Or swat one. With a flyswatter.

[beam me up scottie]

17. LOL!

[rhett o rick]

24. I hope that is just water and not vodka that you are spitting out. nm

[beam me up scottie]

27. I would never waste good vodka like that!

I only use cheap beer for spit-takes!

[PatrickforO]

38. So how did you guys GET the bug??

The first time I saw it when I'd just found DU I thought it was a REAL bug. I actually reached out and touched my screen...

[madfloridian]

79. Right click the image, choose Copy Image Location

Then paste it into your sig line.

[Oilwellian]

55. What bug?

[rhett o rick]

60. You don't see the bug? Maybe i need to check my brownies. nm

[Ron Green]

8. Bernie says:

"We've all gotta get to work."

That's what he says, and that's all that matters.

[GoneFishin]

10. As long as a candidate says what I want to hear at some point in their life I will vote for them.

I know that if I want to hear it, and they say something that sort of sounds like it at least once, it must be true.

[rhett o rick]

11. Once again I have to disagree. I only rec to expose your nonsense to more people.

Watching HRC try to explain her new stands on issues is great. Did you see her on Rachel's telling the story how she went to NASDEQ and got tough with "them" telling them to "stop it". The visual that comes with that is hilarious. Did she stand on the balcony and shout from a megaphone? Did she go person to person, wagging her finger? Or did she drive by in her limo and shout out the window? Too bad there is no record of that event. To give her the benefit of the doubt, they must not have heard her, because I'd hate to think they heard her but are ignoring her. of course her unsubstantiated tough talk to someone somewhere got her "fans" excited. They love that Margaret Thatcher impression she likes to do.

[JDPriestly]

43. I wonder how much NASDAQ paid her for the speech in which she told them to stop it.

[PatrickforO]

47. You know what that story reminds me of?

My wife and I have four cats. Two are kittens and one of the kittens, Atticus, is really destructive. We try to keep it in check, but sometimes he gets the better of us.

Anyway, today, I was meditating and all of a sudden I heard this crash behind me.

Atticus had hung off the very top of the bookshelf in my home office and batted at a ceramic figurine until it fell off the shelf!

Well, I was thoroughly perturbed. I stood up and said, "God dammit! You stupid cat..."

So here I am yelling at little Atticus and he jumps up to the seat of my chair and just stares up at me.

I had to laugh.

I think the Wall Street guys were like Atticus when Hillary visited Nasdaq. "Yeah, Senator Clinton, we'll get right on that!"

[rhett o rick]

61. I can match your cat stories. My cat is Attila. When she was young, she earned her name.

One is that when she was young she loved to lay on my crt computer monitor and hang over the front and sleep. Well she finally got big enough that she slid off the back down behind the monitor and everything. Had to work to get her out. But the best was when we upgraded to a LCD monitor. She couldn't figure that out.

On edit: I love to get one up on my cats.

[BeanMusical]

82. Did she dodge sniper bullets over there too?

[demwing]

12. Looks clear

https://m.

[rhett o rick]

25. LOL.

[moobu2]

13. I agree with your post title

[Hissyspit]

18. Really?

[moobu2]

29. Yep

[Hissyspit]

59. You didn't care when he said he was sick of the fake Hillary email scandal?

Last edited Sun Nov 8, 2015, 06:56 PM - Edit history (1)

You don't care when he tells the people facts about income inequality in this country?

You don't care when he says things like this: “Making sure that seniors have the nutrition that they need is not only the right thing to do, it is the financially smart thing to do."

You didn't care when he said things like this: http://www.sanders.senate.gov/video/flashback-rep-bernie-sanders-opposes-iraq-war

Do you think Hillary cares what he has to say?

[Dawgs]

21. Why? Is it becuase you prefer the moderate establishment candidate instead? n/t

[moobu2]

30. Well, Bernie Sanders cant get elected so there's that

and there's the fact that he's just as establishment as any politician since he's spent nearly his entire adult life as a politician. The U.S. presidency isn't some kind of dictatorship and if Bernie Got elected he would have to deal with the Republicans and compromise to get anything done then his supporters would see him for what he really is....Just another politician who wants to be president.

[Live and Learn]

35. Actually, Bernie's spent nearly his entire adult life as a politician bucking the establishment. NT

[PatrickforO]

39. Ah...the can't get elected meme!

Cool! It's only been a few minutes since I saw it last.

I was getting worried...

[redstateblues]

48. Not a meme- it's reality. Bernie is losing

sorry to break in a "Bernie is not really a politician" thread with a little dose of reality

[Plucketeer]

81. All this kiddie-time puddle stomping

What I'd like to see is some speculation as to just what the nay-sayers are gonna be saying once Bernie's the nominee. Seriously - what will be the chatter after the numbers are tallied on primary night and Sanders is the winner?

LOL...... Would LOVE to be a fly on the wall wherever DWS is when she gets the news. Prolly be like befuddled ol' Pudgy Karl was when his weighted horse failed to win!

[merrily]

46. Based on what? He does pretty in one to one match ups with Republicans, often better than Hills. nt

[redstateblues]

50. based on the fact that Bernie is losing badly

and has hit a ceiling. Matching him up with Hillary is his problem.

[merrily]

52. You changed the subject from the general to the primary, so we're going in a circle.

It won't do Democrats a lot of good if Hillary wins the primary and loses the general now will it?

[moobu2]

53. Bernie can not win either so it doesn't really matter does it? You dont have to answer that.

[merrily]

54. As my prior post said, he's doing better in some general match ups than Hillary, so

your claim that he can't win the general is baseless.

[moobu2]

62. But this is without Republicans relentlessly and viciously attacking him 24/7

Hillary has been attacked for years by them and more recently by Bernie Sanders and his supporters. They rarely even mention Bernie Sanders name at all because they know who the nominee is going to be. Anyway, If they were to suspect that Bernie Sanders would be the nominee they would pounce and Bernies numbers would collapse. Trust me, I'm always right.

[merrily]

63. Sorry, I'm going with the polls.

Hillary has had every possible advantage on her side, has campaigned for at least 8 years, etc. And, you're wrong, both the right and the center right have been attacking Bernie all along, along with the media, including MSNBC. He's had no one on his side but his ordinary people supporters and donors. Trying to portry Hillary as the victim and embattled underdog in comparison with Bernie is laughable.

[eridani]

65. Clinton cannot attract support from the 63% who skipped voting in 2014

Sanders can. Sanders will get far more crossover support from independents and Repubs--maybe even a few teabaggers who decide that they hate banksters more than immigrants. Not a chance of that with Clinton.

[stonecutter357]

77. +1

[Hiraeth]

16. Coincidentally, you remain consistent and clear and, may I add, concise.

Thanks for the alliterating chuckle.

[MannyGoldstein]

36. Thank you!

[Vattel]

20. She has been very consistent.

As a senator, she supported regime change in Iraq that resulted in suffering, death, and chaos that continues today; and then as SOS she supported regime change in Libya that resulted in suffering, death, and chaos that continues today.

[rhett o rick]

26. Some people like that take charge and attack attitude. Some times I swear her picture

morphs into Margaret Thatcher's face. I am usually drinking.

[jeff47]

31. Don't forget Honduras

As SoS she supported regime change there too. You'll never guess what that resulted in.

[Vattel]

32. Um, suffering, death and chaos that continues today?

[tex-wyo-dem]

72. Yes, parts of its affects that ended up...

At our borders in the form of Honduran children suffering in deplorable conditions and being deported back to the chaos.

[Vattel]

75. sorry, I was answering Jeff47's rhetorical question as if I didn't know the answer

[senz]

33. Haven't watched Rachel's Dem Forum b/c last night we caught that woman

chortling about "the Koch Brothers" and then about how she "needs the American people to back her up," and it was so surreal, so bizarre -- so unabashedly redolent of what Bernie has been saying for months -- that we had to watch a South Park episode to clear our heads.

She'll say anything, doesn't matter what it is, that she thinks will get her the nomination.

As Gertrude Stein said of Oakland, "There's no 'there' there."

That is not the kind of leader I want. Evah.

[captainarizona]

34. what is bernie's poll numbers with minority voters

African-americans? Latinos? native Americans? Asians?

[merrily]

42. As long as we're going off topic, how many people of color died in the Iraq War so far? nt

[Fairgo]

58. I know the answer, unfortunately

All of them. Every single one.

[wildeyed]

37. Like How Sanders was an Independent until it was convenient to become a Democrat?

Politics is a racket. You can't win if you don't play the game. Apparently Bernie “I am not a Democrat, period" Sanders came to play. And I am ok with that, since I don't think anyone who was above that kind of thing could possibly be effective. You like him better, fine. You agree with his policy more, also fine. But the mere fact that he is in the race with a D next to his name makes him a hypocrite too.

[merrily]

41. You would rather he ran for President as an Independent? Hmmm.

[JDPriestly]

44. Do you think it would have been better if he had run as an Independent and split

the vote of Democrats in the 2016 general election?

That was the alternative. But Bernie chose to vote as a Democrat to avoid splitting the Democratic vote in 2016 -- like Nader did in 2000.

[wildeyed]

67. That is not what we are debating.

Just pointing out the logic fail. OP states that consistency is the most important thing when deciding to support a candidate. I noted that Sanders saying that “I am not a Democrat, period" and then running as a Democrat is the exact same thing that the OP is demonizing Clinton for. Doing what is politically expedient even though it contradicts your previous statements on the subject.

Like I said before, I have no problem with this from either candidate. Politics is messy, sometimes you do what you need to do. All politicians compromise. It is the very basis of democracy. But they way you justify the behavior in your candidate because you happen to agree with his reasoning, but demonize it in the others? That is dishonest.

[JDPriestly]

78. Sanders has voted with and caucused with Democrats for his term in Congress.

I think he is a better Democrat by objective standards than most of the people who run on the Democratic ticket in our country.

[PatrickforO]

45. I disagree.

The last time a third party candidate even had a chance in hell was clear back in 1912.

Our game is rigged with two parties and that's it.

Therefore, even if you are, say, a Social Democrat and you've always been an Independent, if you are serious about the race, you run as an R or a D.

In a sense, you're blaming the victim.

But cheer up. When Bernie wins, it may birth a Social Democratic party here in the good old USA. Think of it - corporations taxed the way they should be, Wall Street well regulated with Glass-Steagall reinstated, a tax on securities transactions funding free tuition for our children and grandchildren at state schools, the payroll tax cap lifted off Social Security to make it solvent well past the middle of the century, and the end of shitty, rationed 'free market' healthcare - Americans have SINGLE PAYER like we should have clear back in the 1920s.

Yep. But that's all a bother, isn't it? Gosh, we can't have a (gasp!) independent (shudder) running as a Democrat, now can we?

[merrily]

57. Shhh. Apparently, democracy is out of date. Now, heaven knows, anything goes.

[MannyGoldstein]

68. Because caucusing with the Democratic Party is

profoundly different than being a Democrat.

Whereas, say, fighting against same-sex marriage is functionally the same as approving of same-sex marriage.

[wildeyed]

84. Another logic fail.

Because yes, if you first said “I am not a Democrat, period" and then become a Democrat because you want to run for President, you are changing your position because it is politically convenient. Whether it was the right call or not has no bearing. Whether Clinton's changes are worse also has no bearing. You set the parameters of the discussion and set the bar as absolute consistency, not me.

As I said before, I don't really care that he did it. If anyone asked me what I thought about the party change, and of course no one did because all Bernie supporters do is lecture and harangue, I would have told you that I thought the party change was the right call. But I don't demand absolute purity from my candidate. You are the one making bold, blanket (unsupportable) statements calling for absolute consistency. At least own it.

Also, FYI, many Democrats like BOTH candidates. When we are attacked for not absolutely liking your chosen candidate the best, for having slightly different priorities or loyalties, it actually pushes us into the other candidates arms. Not directed only to you, more a general comment.

[JDPriestly]

40. Well said. Thank you.

[99Forever]

49. It's crystal clear to me

No matter how much the pretenders try to muddy the waters.

[Paka]

51. K&R

The way forward is exceptionally clear.

[Kalidurga]

56. I am still waiting for Hillary's supporters to start talking policy.

But so far all I get is Bernie so mean.

Berniebros so white.

Brogressives so aggressive.

Hillary is so swell.

I don't think anyone is listening to what any candidate is actually saying. Now expecting people to look at actual records? It will never happen.

[wildeyed]

85. Wait, you are complaining about ad hominem attacks by making an ad hominem attack?

That is total bullshit. You can see that, right?

[Kalidurga]

86. You use that phrase I don't think it means what you think it means.

I attacked no one's character. I have however pointed out the kind of posts I have seen and commented on the quality of those posts.

[wildeyed]

87. And totally justified people's impressions of Bernie's supporters (and by extension your candidate)

as aggressive, mean and insensitive by writing a post, that in very few words, manages to convey all of those traits. Great going! You guys know that this is a public board and people actually read your posts, right? I dunno, but when it is me posting with a candidate's name in my sig line, I am a bit more careful to not make offensive or needlessly aggressive posts because those will all be associated with the candidate. They actually convince people who might be persuadable AWAY from your candidate. But I guess it is more important to fan the flames of your own little personal wars. And now you want to bitch about how no one will talk policy? Too much..... Online Bernie supporters are a trip.

http://news.stanford.edu/news/2015/october/framing-persuasive-messages-101215.html

[Kalidurga]

88. Annnnnnnnnnnd still nothing here is inaccurate

This is what I have seen here since the end of June. Those are the names that have been bandied about by Hillary supporters. Not all of them by a long shot. But, my assessment of those posts about Bernie and his supporters is the correct one. You still don't have a handle on what is an attack on a person's character and what is an attack on what people post.

That is a nice link. But when someone slanders a person who is supporting Bernie or slanders Bernie himself, what values am I supposed to infer that they have so that I can persuade them to stop the personal attacks and the slander?

[wildeyed]

89. But I am not particularly a Hillary supporter.

Or I wasn't. I am a good Democrat and longtime activist who thinks both candidates have great things to offer. Disagreeing with you is not slander, it is a simple difference of opinion. Your assessment is shit. Your original post is obnoxious at best and can be construed as racially insensitive (Berniebros so white. Really?) When you post crap like that WITH YOUR CANDIDATE'S NAME IN YOUR SIG, It hurts your candidate, which is too bad because he actually has a lot of good things to say. But whatever. Have fun being "correct". I'm out.....

[Kalidurga]

90. Goodbye

Thanks it was fun talking to someone who thinks it's swell to name call on one side yet the other should just zip it.

[cui bono]

64. But what about what his supporters say?

Apparently that's what makes people support Hillary. God knows they can't base it on her record.

[Enthusiast]

66. K&R! Let it ever be said, "The clear way forward is clear." This is a philosophy I can embrace.

I wish the voters would give it some consideration. Fuck.

[tblue]

69. I was just saying that yesterday!

Reading my mind again, Manny.

[PatrynXX]

74. yep

track record would indicate Trump is more Centrist than Hillary is. He's pro Planned Parenthood and belongs to a faith thats pro woman. Has a history of hiring Hispanics. Thats his record.

Like Mitt Romney.. He lost because he pretended to be Right Wing. He's not. He's Centrist.

[99th_Monkey]

76. NO FAIR!

Now you're hitting below the belt.

We are supposed to fawn on every "new" position our candidate says,
especially if it parrots another candidates long-held position and plays
well with M$M and voters who can't be bothered to bore themselves to
tears looking at ancient history of records and such.

Shame shame.

[aspirant]

83. TPP, let's go get'um Hill and Bill

start rounding up NO votes